Saturday, July 28, 2007

How can I convince people that driving a car that is powered by a coal-burning electrical plant is an unwise decision? It's all pretty simple, really. The energy conversion equations are time tested on this stuff, and you're never going to be able to crank as much power out of the grid as you would if you used the primary source, as required, but it's all just too complex for the average dolt to understand, since it requires quite a bit of math and applied physics to understand this stuff.

Put it this way; if you can make cheap electricity by running a bunch of water passed a turbine, it makes sense to do so, since the energy is being provided by gravity and there is little to no side effects from doing it this way. Burning coal to make electricity is a lot more wasteful, and much more expensive. And since the Eco-Phreaks only like to look at one side of the equation when showing the dolts the arithmetic, it makes the easy sale on how "Green" it all is. Electricity is a high-grade source of power that creates low grade heat, and just about everything else. Electricity is not "Green" in the least, since it's not a primary source and can only be produced by expending another resource, but there have been, literally, generations who've been taught exactly otherwise.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

One of my often visited dolts just grabs a piece of information from wherever, in this case from the god-awful Communist Broadcast System and commences to making conclusions based upon nothing more than coincidences on a timeline.

Got news for you here, Bob, the little "something" that you are hinting at was NOT George W. Bush being sworn in to the Presidency of the United States. Nor was the fact that your personal hero, Billy Bob Clinton, being President from '93 to '01, in any way responsible for the explosive growth the was seen during th '90's.

Corner an economist, Bob, at least one who will admit to being a free market adherent anyway, and he'll tell you the same thing, you lickspittle shit-for-brains.

The showdown over a far larger issue that the above subject is tangential to is coming. Count on it.

Rugged American individualism could hinder our ability to understand other peoples' point of view, a new study suggests.

And in contrast, the researchers found that Chinese are more skilled at understanding other people's perspectives, possibly because they live in a more "collectivist" society.

"This cultural difference affects the way we communicate," said study co-author and cognitive psychologist Boaz Keysar of the University of Chicago.

Simple study

The study, though oversimplified compared to real life, was instructive. Keysar and his colleagues arranged two blocks on a table so participants could see both. However, a piece of cardboard obstructed the view of one block so a "director," sitting across from the participant, could only see one block.

When the director asked 20 American participants (none of Asian descent) to move a block, most were confused as to which block to move and did not take into account the director's perspective. Even though they could have deduced that, from thedirector's seat, only one block was on the table.

Most of the 20 Chinese participants, however, were not confused by the hidden block and knew exactly which block the director was referring to. While following directions was relatively simple for the Chinese, it took Americans twice as long to move a block.

"That strong, egocentric communication of Westerners was nonexistent when we looked at Chinese," Keysar said. "The Chinese were very much able to put themselves in the shoes of another when they were communicating."

The results are detailed in the July issue of the journal Psychological Science. Collectivist societies, such as the Chinese, place more value on the needs of the group and less on the autonomy of the individual. In these societies, understanding other peoples' experiences is a more critical social skill than it is among typically more individualist Americans.

Gross oversimplification

"Of course, these are very gross oversimplifications," said Keysar. "Even in America, you can find collectivist societies. For example, working class people tend to be much more collective."

Culture appears to direct our eyes to read others' emotions, too.

Psychologists at Hokkaido University in Japan have found that Japanese gaze at the shape of a person's eyes, while Americans focus on the mouth. When people from the two cultures interact, these crisscrossed sightlines can lead to miscommunication.

"We all know people from different cultures are different. This is not new. But what research is now showing is how they're different and what are the implications," Keysar told LiveScience. "If we are aware of how we think differently, this can go a long way toward not allowing these differences to get in the way of reaching mutual understanding."

At once, I am almost speechless, while filled with rage that someone has the utter vacuousness between the ears to write such drivel. There are at least a few implications here that I could expand upon, and the fears that these would, quite understandably, raise, at least to those with a pulse, but I'll let anyone who dares read this tripe decide for themselves what to make of it.

The scariest part of it to me is this, there are people in this country who actually think this way, and they also vote. Consider that for a moment.

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Feckless fucks will definitely be able to pull this off over in Ole Blighty, and the food police have already started in with it here as well, as most everyone knows. This behavior is a function of diseased thinking, and will only lead to pure misery. It's spreading too, which is maybe the only thing that will turn the whole thing around in the end, since banning food is something that people might be willing to push back on, but only if there are sweeping, draconian changes across the entire country, virtually simultaneously.

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

"Most important of all, however, is the fact that the measurement has been defined in terms with which the average human being has no relationship, and nofamiliarity either."

When one wants to measure something, and be able to relate that very measurement to another human, there are no other systems that present a more reasonable degree of communicating that measurement than the imperial system, because of its inherent anthropometric basis. This relative system is as ancient as the practice of architecture itself, one of the most primal instincts of man, that of manipulating his environment to better suit his needs. Its use in teaching the fundamentals of correct proportions is found in many iconic architect's buildings and drawings, including Vitruvius, Alberti, Michelangelo and Corbusier, to name just a few.

Interestingly enough, I was recently watching a program on the idiot box, and the native people of the area were building canoes with an adz, hollowing out an enormous tree truck...and using their hands, spanning from thumb to pinky, as their measuring device. And it worked just fine for proportioning the thing. Why change something that works so well and is at your disposal at an instant?

I'm sticking with the foot and inch for measuring, thankyouverymuch, and fuck the damned metric system. I'm not switching to some other godawful nonsense, even at the point of a gun.

Thursday, July 05, 2007

It is to laugh. I mean, a Prius at 100mph? How much...I mean...what does it cost to do that? How environmentally irresponsible is it to drive even a Prius at that speed? A speeding Prius! Oh, I just can't stand it. Yugo, Trabant and Edsel jokes are gaining a cousin here.

It seems that the LibDemEco-Phreak TreeHuggers have themselves a little situation to spin.

Honestly, I couldn't care any less about this. He has it bad enough being the son of the Goracle. I mean, I'd probably be hitting the bong too, if I were forced to live his life. It's probably even worse than what it appears to be on the surface. I'd just call it a life and commit Seppuku, just to get it over with.